stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Teleman <>
Subject Re: STDCXX-1066 [was: Re: STDCXX forks]
Date Sun, 23 Sep 2012 21:23:52 GMT
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Liviu Nicoara <> wrote:

> Stefan, I stumbled upon this: and this:

The first URL is Fujitsu. It doesn't mention anything about the
side-effects of KU-137111. It's just a description on how to apply
kernel patches.

The second URL says this:

Due to a change in the implementation of the userland mutexes
introduced by CR 6296770 in KU 137111-01, objects of type mutex_t and
pthread_mutex_t must start at 8-byte aligned addresses. If this
requirement is not satisfied, all non-compliant applications on
Solaris/SPARC may fail with the signal SEGV with a callstack similar
to the following one or with similar callstacks containing the
function mutex_trylock_process.

  \*_atomic_cas_64(0x141f2c, 0x0, 0xff000000, 0x1651, 0xff000000, 0x466d90)
  set_lock_byte64(0x0, 0x1651, 0xff000000, 0x0, 0xfec82a00, 0x0)
  fast_process_lock(0x141f24, 0x0, 0x1, 0x1, 0x0, 0xfeae5780)


I think that's pretty clear.

What I can share with you is:

1. The SPARC alignment patches as I have submitted them here are
present in the official production stdcxx packages released with
Solaris 10 and Solaris 11.

2. These patches did not make into the Solaris source code tree and a
Solaris product without extensive internal code review. Not to mention


Stefan Teleman
KDE e.V.

View raw message